Quick Links

Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA

The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.

Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Less archaic than pledging allegiance to people, which was the old version. Actually, I think Commonwealth citizens sometimes still have to swear loyalty to the Queen. I'm almost certain Governors-General do.

Depends on the role. I think police and military in NZ still swear a loyalty oath to the Queen. I'm not 100% sure about that

Less archaic than pledging allegiance to people, which was the old version. Actually, I think Commonwealth citizens sometimes still have to swear loyalty to the Queen. I'm almost certain Governors-General do.

The reasonable requirement doesn't mean that the administrator has to believe violence will happen. Simply that it's more likely to happen. Or that he'll end up with a sufficient enough of a screaming match that class will be disrupted. Is it really that unreasonable to believe that those t-shirts wouldn't be seen as aggressively confrontational given the raised emotional levels? Even Tinker leaves that as an out for school administrators. And we're also debating this as if the students in question are "good" students. For all we know they may not be. If they or one has a history of fighting then it's without question the right call to make.

The administrator cannot simply believe that violence is more likely than it was before--after all, as in Tinker, any controversial opinion could, theoretically, lead to a fight. It has to be that they believe violence, or comparably significant disruption, has become significantly likely. I doubt that belief is reasonable in this situation, especially given that nothing (which is exactly what I would expect) actually happened on the first day.

In my High School you could sit out the pledge quietly, but it made you stand out like a sore thumb and you'd get a lot of shit for it. I was kind of a rebellious teen, so I sat these out. One time a guy tried to lift me out of my set to get me to say the pledge.

In my elementary school, you had to say both the Pledge of Allegiance and the Christian Pledge. I'm not even sure if the second one was a real thing, or just made up for our school. Let me look it up...

Ah yes

I pledge allegiance to the Christian Flag and to the Savior for whose Kingdom it stands. One Savior, crucified, risen, and coming again with life and liberty to all who believe.

Feeeeel the warm thrill of emotion
that space cadet glow,
well, I've got some bad news for you sunshine
Pink isn't well, he's stayed back in the Hotel
And they sent us along, as a surrogate band
We're gonna find out where you fans really staa-ha-haaaaand.

*elevator dings*

Are there any queers in the audience tonight, GET THEM UP AGAINST THE WALL

*Elevator doors open*

And that one looks jewish, AND THAT ONE's A COON, WHO LET ALL THIS RIFF RAFF INTO THE ROOM!

The reasonable requirement doesn't mean that the administrator has to believe violence will happen. Simply that it's more likely to happen. Or that he'll end up with a sufficient enough of a screaming match that class will be disrupted. Is it really that unreasonable to believe that those t-shirts wouldn't be seen as aggressively confrontational given the raised emotional levels? Even Tinker leaves that as an out for school administrators. And we're also debating this as if the students in question are "good" students. For all we know they may not be. If they or one has a history of fighting then it's without question the right call to make.

The administrator cannot simply believe that violence is more likely than it was before--after all, as in Tinker, any controversial opinion could, theoretically, lead to a fight. It has to be that they believe violence, or comparably significant disruption, has become significantly likely. I doubt that belief is reasonable in this situation, especially given that nothing (which is exactly what I would expect) actually happened on the first day.

Children do not have full extension of their rights. This includes speech.

Regardless of anything happened or would happen, it was in the Principal's authority to do what he had to do.

From what I understand, he allowed "Gay Pride" and "Straight Pride" shirts. He made the Straight Pride shirts mark out their offensive religious text.